Actually, I remember right after the January 2010 unveiling of the iPad, opinion was bifurcated: you either thought the iPad was the next gotta-have Apple product, or you dismissed it as a "giant iPod Touch." When it finally hit the market a few months later, enough people put their money where their mouth was to make it the fastest selling Apple product in history, up to that point in time. So much for the "no one will pay for a giant iPod Touch" theory.

Companies who thought the tablet market was all played out with the failure of Microsoft's UMPC suddenly sat up and took notice. And iPad's initial success (for the first 5 months) was with iOS 3.2. So much for the "multitasking made it competitive" theory; iPad was kicking ass FROM THE START.

Everyone is still missing the point. The media was right then and they would still be right if they stuck to their guns. Steve managed to sell something that is not as useful as something else he could shave sold. Imagine he came out with an iPad that ran a real OS and all that other shit. That would have been to everyone's expectations. Still, despite the large adoption, it does so little and he has somehow managed to force people to accept less.

What absolute bullshit. If you want the full functionality of a compeer, then buy a fk'n computer. Like the brilliant MB Air. The iPad is a completely different device that serves to deliver digital content, along with apps, and do so at a specific price point. To load a full OS and do the work of a full computer, you would be at a totally different price point and user profile. The iPad is for people who want an easy to hold and carry, AND EASY TO USE, device for their iOS apps and digital content. It's also for people who don't want the hassles of a full featured computer yet can still access the internet and email, etc.

Everyone is still missing the point. The media was right then and they would still be right if they stuck to their guns. Steve managed to sell something that is not as useful as something else he could shave sold. Imagine he came out with an iPad that ran a real OS and all that other shit. That would have been to everyone's expectations. Still, despite the large adoption, it does so little and he has somehow managed to force people to accept less.

What you don't see is that iPad enables people who would have never used computers and use iPad to connect and play.

My two year olds (twins) can pick up the iPad and find the app they want to play. I sat them at front of the computer and their little hands just can't control the mouse. They did not "get" the mouse.

Actually, I remember right after the January 2010 unveiling of the iPad, opinion was bifurcated: you either thought the iPad was the next gotta-have Apple product, or you dismissed it as a "giant iPod Touch." When it finally hit the market a few months later, enough people put their money where their mouth was to make it the fastest selling Apple product in history, up to that point in time. So much for the "no one will pay for a giant iPod Touch" theory.

Companies who thought the tablet market was all played out with the failure of Microsoft's UMPC suddenly sat up and took notice. And iPad's initial success (for the first 5 months) was with iOS 3.2. So much for the "multitasking made it competitive" theory; iPad was kicking ass FROM THE START.

I didn't think I was getting one at first, I just stopped by the store to play with it a bit. After I play with it for 5 minutes, I "got" it. The size was perfect, and the battery lasts longer than the laptops.

But the original criticism was warranted, it basically was a giant ipod Touch at launch and Apple improved the iPad immensely since then. They launched a tablet that initially couldn't even multitask. Now it's world class leading product.

The media criticism was warranted, and still is. It still isn't much more than a big iPod Touch. Lucky for Apple, there are millions of people for whom a big iPod Touch is just what they want.

But the original criticism was warranted, it basically was a giant ipod Touch at launch

And that was part of why many folks wanted it. They loved what the iPod Touch could do but wished it had a bigger screen.

They got their wish and bought it in droves

Compared to the media who were looking at it as a computer and could only see what it didn't do as such. One would think that using iOS on it would have clued them in that it wasn't designed to be a computer and do all things computer. But they didn't catch the clue

The "missing multi-tasking" is a function of the OS not the iPad and was available within a month of it's launch anyway. The iPad sold like gangbusters from day one regardless of that fact. It wasn't hobbled, missing any parts, or incomplete in any way.

You are right, Prof. People have very selective and short memories. The article is absolutely correct. Go back and visit this forum from the time following the original launch for illustration. I was amazed at the resistance and lack of foresight members displayed. Sometimes the hostility was palpable. The 'giant iPod' criticism was bandied about left and right without realizing how very cool and brilliant (and different) that would be. The lack of multitasking was blown out of the water.

With Lion, Apple dropped PPC emulation -- completely arbitrarily -- thus throwing a whole generation of otherwise perfectly good -- and working well -- software in the trash.

.

Actually they didn't. The move to requiring Rosetta was a major clue to anyone that was paying attention that PPC apps weren't natively supported. And they were very up front that the emulation was gone when Lion was announced.

As for your 'whole generation' comment, pretty much every major company had stopped making PPC versions of their apps way before Lion. It's not their or Apple's fault if folks didn't buy the updates

Licensing is expensive, complicated and it would eat until their digital sales

Quote:

3D screens

flash in the pan item that hasn't really taken off for video. unlikely they are going to force those hideous glasses on folks to use their computer

Quote:

and matte options on the iMac.

Sales of the glossy iMac as well as the matte option on the notebooks will likely show that folks aren't really that keen on the matte and don't deem it as vital so the best you might get is an option to custom order it on the 27 inch iMac since that is the more likely 'business' model in the line up. But never in stores

I think Licensing KILLS the urge of innovation as a vehicle for survival.
Licensing IS bad for start-ups.

?: Confused? Let me explain. Anyone can build a business to compete with Apple, but how would you compete with Microsoft or Google?
Still confused?: Google and Microsoft hide under the cartel that sells their OS. How can a start ups compete against the almighty cartels that sell Android and Microsoft OS.

Probably you'll never got it. Apple = today Germany, while Microsoft and now Google = USA current economic model, where cheap is cherished, because it allows easy market-share grab.

Enough with the marketing drip, drip, drip. I'd rather wait for the book to learn all about it.

See, now I'm just the opposite .... I enjoy previews. How about we do this. I'll continue to read all the previews .... that will keep me happy, and you can just ignore them. That will keep you happy, no? As they say at Staples .... "That was easy."

Apple, bigger than Google, √ ..... bigger than Microsoft, √ The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.

Most of the sites that my wife and my daughter are even remotely interested in. Neither of them even bother with our iPad at all anymore because it's seldom capable of doing what they want.

That's just it right? If you had truly productive tasks to perform, to which a tablet computer were suited, you wouldn't be sprouting this b.s. All you are interested in, according to your own words, are web sites that rely on the laziness of flash to entertain. Go grab a netbook then and don't clutter up this thread!

What did Jobs expect? He could have stopped working years ago and would have lived comfortably. You don't go the to lackey for advice...what do they know?

I'm not at all sure that he was "going to the lackey for advice" .... more like confirmation that he had indeed correctly predicted, once again, what the public wanted. He was well known as being a perfectionist, after all ..... and I'm sure that a misstep on his part would not go over well.

Apple, bigger than Google, √ ..... bigger than Microsoft, √ The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.

I'm not at all sure that he was "going to the lackey for advice" .... more like confirmation that he had indeed correctly predicted, once again, what the public wanted. He was well known as being a perfectionist, after all ..... and I'm sure that a misstep on his part would not go over well.

True...I think Jobs was an artists that wanted others to see what he saw and admire and I imagine he was off put by those who didn't see it.

And let's face it...those coving the Tech Industry can fall into the trap of becoming jaded and not really realizing what technology interfaces with the common consumer that doesn't get early access to products.

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.- SolipsismX

The media criticism was warranted, and still is. It still isn't much more than a big iPod Touch. Lucky for Apple, there are millions of people for whom a big iPod Touch is just what they want.

Sure the criticism was warranted but 18 months later and millions of iPads later shows the disconnect between the Media and the consumer. Apple was right (again) they were wrong. People "did" want a larger iPad Touch and Apple was smart enough not to recreate the wheel.

Actually they were even more behind as the iPad design was started first.

Everyone is still missing the point. The media was right then and they would still be right if they stuck to their guns. Steve managed to sell something that is not as useful as something else he could shave sold. Imagine he came out with an iPad that ran a real OS and all that other shit. That would have been to everyone's expectations. Still, despite the large adoption, it does so little and he has somehow managed to force people to accept less.

No the media was stupid. When they announced the price, there was an immediate HOLY SHIT!! reaction as everyone and their mother had predicted at least $1000 for the lowest price. Then they kicked into "Wait Apple is selling something relatively cheap, there must be something wrong with it" mode and started lambasting it. It launched w/a thousand apps already iPad specific. What did Android tablets launch with? 30? It didn't have multitasking, big fucking deal. It did what people expected. They could listen to music, watch movies, surf the web, play with apps. It was perfectly useful from day 1 and has only gotten more so since. We have one of the originals and we're talking about both getting iPad 3s in the spring.

On the other hand, if the media in general begins to fawn over every new Apple release and grant Apple a free pass to deliver less than the best products, it's likely the the company will degenerate as rapidly as the health of a well fed monarch.

Do you honestly think it's criticism that drives people to do better? No, it is the desire to achieve their own vision. Critics can take *no* credit.

"With Apple now being run by Tim Cook and the executive team Jobs assembled and orchestrated, it remains to be see if the media will continue to mock and denigrate its products while enthusiastically recommending alternatives that are almost always inferior, poorly designed and deeply flawed. "

You have GOT to be kidding.

People who have been around for longer than a few years will remember that every Apple launch of ANYTHING is greeted with squealing ecstasy from fanboys, magazine cover stories bordering on outright fellatio, and standing ovations from everyone else.

The idea that Apple is the underdog in the media coverage department is flat-out false.

Even Apple would agree with me -- and I'm a total fan.

Amen
This article is pathetic and total fanboi fodder.
Tallest Shill will feel elation thou...

Um, I accept your Apple partisanship but the Gizmodo incident was not well handled by Apple and raised some legitimate questions about the heavy-handed tactics employed by Apple (which continue). the relationship of Apple and the San Mateo County Police, and the impartiality of the Police and DAs Office.

I think it speaks for itself that ultimately no charges were filed, no civil lawsuits pressed and really, no harm done - iPhone 4 went on to break records. And the remarks by the San Mateo DA when dropping the case were actually unprofessional and did not remove the egg from their faces in light of what preceded, including the strong-arm tactics used against Jason Chen.

Lumping Gizmodo together with the Instant Enemies of Apple is also a but incredible if you go back to read the Gizmodo reviews of Apple products (and their competitors products for contrast) which are overall positive.

And then there is the bit about Woz dropping by the Gizmodo office to make nice with Jason Chen, will you next be attacking him as an Apple Hater?

I think you made your point with the remainder of the other instant pundit reviews but failed to make the case against Gizmodo: their initial impression of the iPad HERE and HERE was objective and generally positive, and in fact the one Gizmodo staffer who felt differently felt compelled to make his case HERE with is on point.

Everyone is still missing the point. The media was right then and they would still be right if they stuck to their guns. Steve managed to sell something that is not as useful as something else he could shave sold. Imagine he came out with an iPad that ran a real OS and all that other shit. That would have been to everyone's expectations. Still, despite the large adoption, it does so little and he has somehow managed to force people to accept less.

If you knew what the hell you were taking about maybe your thoughts might be worthy of consideration. A real OS such as what? Oh right, you mean the one that doesn't exist yet that will run on hardware that also doesn't exist yet.

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

But the original criticism was warranted, it basically was a giant ipod Touch at launch and Apple improved the iPad immensely since then. They launched a tablet that initially couldn't even multitask. Now it's world class leading product.

You just don't have a clue. Of course the initial iPad can and does multitask. If you knew how to look under the hood you would see that dozens of tasks are running at the "same" time. What it didn't and still doesn't do is allow more than one third party app to run. There are hooks that allow audio to run in the background but that was true from the beginning as Apple's "iTunes player" ran in the background since the original launch. That hook was exposed to third parties as Apple and third party developers had more time to tend to more finishing touches. But iOS has been multitasking since day 1.

Running arbitrarily many third party apps in the background is all about battery life. It was a concern at launch and remains a valid design issue. The original iPad was and is a world class product. People who try to rewrite history are in an unenviable position since there are so many iPads in daily use by people who know what horsesh*t this sort of revisionism represents.

For the record, the iPad2 is a nice speed bump (significant graphics speed bump) with slightly slimmer, slightly lighter design but nothing dramatic has changed. It is like saying this year's MacBook Pro is great but last year's was a heap of mediocrity.

Everyone is still missing the point. The media was right then and they would still be right if they stuck to their guns. Steve managed to sell something that is not as useful as something else he could shave sold. Imagine he came out with an iPad that ran a real OS and all that other shit. That would have been to everyone's expectations. Still, despite the large adoption, it does so little and he has somehow managed to force people to accept less.

Here, I'll give you a clue since you obviously can't buy one. Under the hood the iPad (iPhone and iPod touch) is running BSD Unix. Is that enough of a "real" OS for you? It is a device designed for people who are not interested in launching a bash shell and running vi in order to debug some shell scripts so those aspects are not exposed. But if you "jailbreak" your iOS device you certainly can. There were many aspects of the iPhone and iPad that were huge factors in their breakthrough success. Arguably the most important was that a company finally managed to squeeze a "real" rather than a "toy" OS into a mass market mobile device. So not only are you wrong, you are spectacularly wrong.

When I say squeeze, I do mean squeeze. While Mac OS X is (and has been for years) certified to be a compliant Unix OS, there is not a similar designation for iOS. There are probably design choices associated with its battery power limitations and such that would prevent it from receiving such certification for now. But the relationship between the two OS's is not just that they come from the same company. They are built on the same foundation.

The media criticism was warranted, and still is. It still isn't much more than a big iPod Touch. Lucky for Apple, there are millions of people for whom a big iPod Touch is just what they want.

If the media was and is right as you claim, can you please explain why all iPad killers that the media predicted never materialized. Many companies would kill for those big Pad Touch customers but they haven't been to sell them much of anything. Or are you saying there 40 to 50 million dumb people with iPads and 3 to 5 million smart people with other tablets out there?

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams

This article hits the nail on the head and one thing I've noticed is how the YouTube tech pundits who are partner status fall over themselves to tout Android slabs even as they religiously cover Apple. Typically, they do spectard comparisons between the iPhone and the latest Android slab of the week even though measuring specs are the least relevant issue to the consumer. Part of it I understand considering Apple doesn't put out a new device every week and the tech pundits need a constant stream to products to review. On the other hand, if you're getting a check from Google as a YouTube partner, is there a conscious decision or subconscious influence to tout your paymaster's stuff.

What absolute bullshit. If you want the full functionality of a compeer, then buy a fk'n computer. Like the brilliant MB Air. The iPad is a completely different device that serves to deliver digital content, along with apps, and do so at a specific price point. To load a full OS and do the work of a full computer, you would be at a totally different price point and user profile. The iPad is for people who want an easy to hold and carry, AND EASY TO USE, device for their iOS apps and digital content. It's also for people who don't want the hassles of a full featured computer yet can still access the internet and email, etc.

Who gave you the right to define what people should use their computers for? For many people, a tablet like the iPad will more than adequately handle their needs. Heck, I was just talking with someone yesterday who has a 5 year old Windows laptop and just saw my daughter's Touchpad. She made a list of the things she wanted to do and asked if the Touchpad would do them. The answer to every one was 'yes'. The iPad is even more capable.

Her needs were: email, checking her financial accounts online, managing digital photos, and doing Facebook and things like that. For her and millions of other people, they don't need a "fk'n computer". Not everyone has the same needs as you - that's a great lesson for you to learn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdbryan

You just don't have a clue. Of course the initial iPad can and does multitask. If you knew how to look under the hood you would see that dozens of tasks are running at the "same" time. What it didn't and still doesn't do is allow more than one third party app to run. There are hooks that allow audio to run in the background but that was true from the beginning as Apple's "iTunes player" ran in the background since the original launch. That hook was exposed to third parties as Apple and third party developers had more time to tend to more finishing touches. But iOS has been multitasking since day 1.

That's an important point. The problem is that people have preconceived notions of something (like FreeRange above) and are incapable of understanding that the usefulness of a device is not all about the specs or meeting some arbitrary 'requirements'.

If FreeRange were to focus on what people want to do with a computer rather than his own definition of what constitutes a "real" computer, he might understand that the iPad is fine for what many people do.

Similarly, instead of focusing on some arbitrary definition of multitasking, people should be looking at what I want to do. For example:
- play music while browsing the web? Sure, iPad always did that
- check email while watching a movie? Sure, iPad always did that
- play ZombieFarm at the same time as you're playing AngryBirds? No, iPad won't do that - but why would you want to?

Quote:

Originally Posted by acslater017

I'll be honest, I was initially pretty underwhelmed by the initial iPad launch. To be frank, it was one of Apple's/Jobs' most boring keynotes ever. I don't blame for Steve for not being a dynamo of energy at that point in time. But it lacked that usual Apple electricity.

To be clear, I think the iPad is a pretty cool product now - I have an iPad 2. I think part of the misunderstanding of it was that the iPad is so plain physically. Beautiful, slim, capable. But it's especially featureless without software. After all, the iPad is essentially a portal to apps, games, websites, books, and other content. And that stuff did not quite appear to be there at launch.

Sure it was. Everything you mentioned was available on the iPad at launch. Sure, it has gotten better over time, but the iPad did all those things from day 1.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

I can't tell you how annoying it is to read articles from other tech sites that seem to be written on a cocktail napkin and then typed while drunk, filled with typos and lacking a clear, concise statement. So I applaud you for this well written article and although I knew most of what I was reading already, I still enjoyed reading your article, I hope you keep up the good work and continue to hold yourself to a higher standard so I can continue to read about the products I enjoy and the people behind them.

The article is excellent I'd agree, but this one has typos too! I had to re-read one sentence 3 times as the written word rendered it meaningless (begin, instead of being).

I seem to see these mistakes in almost all AI news items these days. One even had Steve Jobs's name spelt wrong, another had Macintosh wrong. Wow! It's incredibly disrespectful at a time when respect is just as important, if not more so, than the information you are trying to convey.

Why don't you guys read your own articles and correct them before publication? I think it's called proof-reading. It only tales a few minutes.

"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee

Everyone is still missing the point. The media was right then and they would still be right if they stuck to their guns. Steve managed to sell something that is not as useful as something else he could shave sold. Imagine he came out with an iPad that ran a real OS and all that other shit. That would have been to everyone's expectations. Still, despite the large adoption, it does so little and he has somehow managed to force people to accept less.

You are completely short minded and don't see the real point of the iPad. You want a "real os" on it. Why? So you can put some stupid program on it you downloaded from the internet? Or run "Real Photoshop"? Or have Flash?! The iPad didn't need to be a laptop. It was never meant to be. It was meant to do a few tasks extremely well that 99.99% of people due every single day which are email, web surfing, consuming media and playing games. It does those things near perfect and yet your too stupid to even see that. Your comment is pathetic. The iPad put those few tasks into the hands of the common man...grandparents, children, aunts and uncles who have no idea how to use a Mac..let alone some god awful windows box and gave them the ability to now use an iPad with basically zero learning curve. You pick it up and your going instantly. Thats what Apple does best. Simplifies the tasks we do in our every day to day lives. Thats why I love Apple so much. They make computing fun for the rest of us....not some stupid geeky tech boy who enjoys spending their days twiddling around with an OS to get it to "work for him" or to "customize it". People like you don't value your time on this earth. I'd much rather have a beautiful device that does exactly what I need it to do..so I can get on with living my life and enjoying that time with my friends and family.